Meningosel ve miyelomeningosel nedeni ile opere edilen 0-1 yaş çocuklarda sentetik dura ile otolog dura kullanımının komplikasyon gelişimi açısından karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Abstract: Aim: The aim of this study is to compare the usage of synthetic and autologous dura mater in terms of complication risk in 0-1-year-old children who were operated for meningocele and myelomeningocele. Material and Methods: This cross-sectional observational study was conducted with 44 children aged 0-1 years who were operated for meningocele and myelomeningocele in a university hospital neurosurgery clinic between November 2010 and December 2016. Patient data were extracted retrospectively from hospital records. The demographics and gestational and clinical features of the mothers and babies, and the need for secondary surgery and the presence of postoperative infection, necrosis, wound dehiscence, and/or neurological deficit were compared between the cases who synthetic dura mater was used in their surgery and those autologous dura was used in their surgery. Results: In total, 86.4% of the 44 infants were preterm, and the predominant neurological problem was plegia in the vast majority. While the defect was located in the lumbar region in more than half of them, myelomeningocele was detected in 77.3% of all cases. The median defect size detected in the patients was 20.0 cm2, primary closure was performed in 30 patients, Limberg flap procedure in 14 patients, however, autologous dura mater and synthetic dura mater were used equally in the patients. The defect size was larger in patients using synthetic dura, furthermore hydrocephalus was found more frequently in these patients. While primary closure was applied in all patients using autologous dura and in one third of the patients using synthetic dura, Limberg flap procedure was applied in two thirds of synthetic dura group. The need for secondary surgery developed more frequently in synthetic dura group, and all postoperative complications were observed more frequently in these patients. In addition, the need for secondary surgery and postoperative necrosis, wound dehiscence, and neurologic deficit are more frequent in patients who underwent Limber flap compared to primary closure. However, the need for secondary surgery and the risk of postoperative complications were similar between primary closure and Limberg flap procedures in synthetic dura group. Conclusion: Although the synthetic dura mater was used in more severe patients, it had a higher need for secondary surgery and a higher risk of complications compared to autologous dura. In patients using synthetic dura, on the other hand, primary closure and Limberg flap had similar efficacy and safety.